IETF Logo Mail Archive

Re: [jose] way forward for two remaining drafts

Mike Jones <Michael.Jones@microsoft.com> Thu, 09 July 2015 17:16 UTC

Return-Path: <Michael.Jones@microsoft.com>
X-Original-To: jose@ietfa.amsl.com
Delivered-To: jose@ietfa.amsl.com
Received: from localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 812381A064C for <jose@ietfa.amsl.com>; Thu, 9 Jul 2015 10:16:31 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -1.901
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.901 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, HTML_MESSAGE=0.001, SPF_HELO_PASS=-0.001, SPF_PASS=-0.001] autolearn=ham
Received: from mail.ietf.org ([4.31.198.44]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id r3RXMEaK49DV for <jose@ietfa.amsl.com>; Thu, 9 Jul 2015 10:16:28 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from na01-bn1-obe.outbound.protection.outlook.com (mail-bn1bon0763.outbound.protection.outlook.com [IPv6:2a01:111:f400:fc10::1:763]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 2085D1A046D for <jose@ietf.org>; Thu, 9 Jul 2015 10:16:27 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from BY2PR03MB442.namprd03.prod.outlook.com (10.141.141.145) by BY2PR03MB442.namprd03.prod.outlook.com (10.141.141.145) with Microsoft SMTP Server (TLS) id 15.1.213.10; Thu, 9 Jul 2015 17:16:22 +0000
Received: from BY2PR03MB442.namprd03.prod.outlook.com ([10.141.141.145]) by BY2PR03MB442.namprd03.prod.outlook.com ([10.141.141.145]) with mapi id 15.01.0213.000; Thu, 9 Jul 2015 17:16:22 +0000
From: Mike Jones <Michael.Jones@microsoft.com>
To: Karen O'Donoghue <odonoghue@isoc.org>, "jose@ietf.org" <jose@ietf.org>
Thread-Topic: [jose] way forward for two remaining drafts
Thread-Index: AQHQtBPYmSM4TItC9UCe1c/L6Qq5JZ3TaI3Q
Date: Thu, 09 Jul 2015 17:16:22 +0000
Message-ID: <BY2PR03MB4424F0C2B5D8839444DD44CF5900@BY2PR03MB442.namprd03.prod.outlook.com>
References: <8FF9C9E8-7259-4818-ADC2-8D70E4FBB9E9@isoc.org>
In-Reply-To: <8FF9C9E8-7259-4818-ADC2-8D70E4FBB9E9@isoc.org>
Accept-Language: en-US
Content-Language: en-US
X-MS-Has-Attach:
X-MS-TNEF-Correlator:
authentication-results: isoc.org; dkim=none (message not signed) header.d=none;
x-originating-ip: [50.47.90.173]
x-microsoft-exchange-diagnostics: 1; BY2PR03MB442; 5:3dEptc+WFlSm1nPheGW9g5Htka3/fZU9tAvvcCk/7AVeZQNHp7NrRAXxjLDdJw0Y2fmqAgwEiKAAXsNO7v2UIiGr7a52UJn28zmzUSNrAJz7sjNTxl8FBtkF91Oy6Sn/NFm0zlvirTbEJS4SUwR/iQ==; 24:GA1jBf8I9qVfpdaAoBq1H5D1ZF4fDIj0VQsdF6wSdrKognB1ybOHpi2eyxJcbheBCW5drJEhy0kz8P6rgMR6iE2AQklTdnhhZDmBu437ip4=; 20:F34XwkCvGyoUXSo3W9gFClh/tsuQmiZY2YEyr8U0V9t7Wvl6oHPVfib0fdNLxNNJg5eVlgINojy6qlALyXGGew==
x-microsoft-antispam: UriScan:;BCL:0;PCL:0;RULEID:;SRVR:BY2PR03MB442;
by2pr03mb442: X-MS-Exchange-Organization-RulesExecuted
x-microsoft-antispam-prvs: <BY2PR03MB442DBB2C0741F6D99A9C4F3F5900@BY2PR03MB442.namprd03.prod.outlook.com>
x-exchange-antispam-report-test: UriScan:(108003899814671);
x-exchange-antispam-report-cfa-test: BCL:0; PCL:0; RULEID:(601004)(2401001)(5005006)(3002001); SRVR:BY2PR03MB442; BCL:0; PCL:0; RULEID:; SRVR:BY2PR03MB442;
x-forefront-prvs: 0632519F33
x-forefront-antispam-report: SFV:NSPM; SFS:(10019020)(377454003)(164054003)(77156002)(86362001)(122556002)(107886002)(19609705001)(2950100001)(2501003)(2900100001)(66066001)(5001960100002)(74316001)(76576001)(102836002)(16236675004)(5001770100001)(5002640100001)(40100003)(189998001)(99286002)(5003600100002)(15975445007)(46102003)(92566002)(106116001)(76176999)(86612001)(19300405004)(77096005)(62966003)(50986999)(54356999)(19580405001)(33656002)(2656002)(19625215002)(87936001)(19617315012)(19580395003)(7059030); DIR:OUT; SFP:1102; SCL:1; SRVR:BY2PR03MB442; H:BY2PR03MB442.namprd03.prod.outlook.com; FPR:; SPF:None; MLV:sfv; LANG:en;
Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="_000_BY2PR03MB4424F0C2B5D8839444DD44CF5900BY2PR03MB442namprd_"
MIME-Version: 1.0
X-OriginatorOrg: microsoft.com
X-MS-Exchange-CrossTenant-originalarrivaltime: 09 Jul 2015 17:16:22.7927 (UTC)
X-MS-Exchange-CrossTenant-fromentityheader: Hosted
X-MS-Exchange-CrossTenant-id: 72f988bf-86f1-41af-91ab-2d7cd011db47
X-MS-Exchange-Transport-CrossTenantHeadersStamped: BY2PR03MB442
Archived-At: <http://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/jose/uyWaK439xG8RQVt_diAn5RkVdRU>
Subject: Re: [jose] way forward for two remaining drafts
X-BeenThere: jose@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.15
Precedence: list
List-Id: Javascript Object Signing and Encryption <jose.ietf.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/options/jose>, <mailto:jose-request@ietf.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/browse/jose/>
List-Post: <mailto:jose@ietf.org>
List-Help: <mailto:jose-request@ietf.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/jose>, <mailto:jose-request@ietf.org?subject=subscribe>
X-List-Received-Date: Thu, 09 Jul 2015 17:16:31 -0000

About https://tools.ietf.org/html/draft-jones-jose-jws-signing-input-options-00, I'll add that this addresses the requests make by Jim Schaad and Richard Barnes in JOSE Issues #26 "Allow for signature payload to not be base64 encoded" and #23 http://trac.tools.ietf.org/wg/jose/trac/ticket/23 "Make crypto independent of binary encoding (base64)".

About https://tools.ietf.org/html/draft-jones-jose-key-managed-json-web-signature-01, I'll add that this addresses the request made by Jim Schaad in JOSE Issue #2 http://trac.tools.ietf.org/wg/jose/trac/ticket/2 "No key management for MAC".

Also, there's a highly relevant discussion about key management for MACs going on in the COSE working group.  See the thread "[Cose] Key management for MACs (was Re: Review of draft-schaad-cose-msg-01)" - especially https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/cose/aUehU6O7Ui8CXcGxy3TquZOxWH4 and https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/cose/ouOIdAOe2P-W8BjGLJ7BNvvRr10.

One could take the view that our decision on the JOSE key management draft should be informed by the related decision in COSE.  Specifically, that if COSE decides to support key management for MACs, the same reasoning likely should apply to our decision on whether to define a standard mechanism for supporting key management for MACs in JOSE.

                                                            -- Mike

From: jose [mailto:jose-bounces@ietf.org] On Behalf Of Karen O'Donoghue
Sent: Wednesday, July 01, 2015 8:38 AM
To: jose@ietf.org
Subject: [jose] way forward for two remaining drafts

Folks,

With the thumbprint draft progressing through the process, we have two remaining individual drafts to decide what to do with. The options include: 1) adopt as working group drafts; 2) ask for AD sponsorship of individual drafts; or 3) recommend that they not be published. Please express your thoughts on what we should do with these drafts. Jim, Kathleen, and I would like to make a decision in the Prague timeframe, so please respond by 15 July.

https://tools.ietf.org/id/draft-jones-jose-jws-signing-input-options-00.txt

https://tools.ietf.org/id/draft-jones-jose-key-managed-json-web-signature-01.txt

Thanks,
Karen

v2.23.0 | Report a Bug | By Email